ECU Rules.....is it time? HELL YES!!!

I ask you all: WHAT would YOU do. Joe did. Trav did. Who else wants to go on record? Kirk? Greg? Solutions people.
[/b]
Click to expand...

I have always said that the problem w/ the "new" ECU rule was the 2 words "or replace." Take those out and you can mod the stock ECU all you can as long as you do it in the box, don't mod the harness, and retain whatever we define the essence of the ECU to be. E.g. motherboard. Any car that can't take advantage of that rule should be given consideration in class and weight. [/b]
Click to expand...

THAT is what I'd do... Take out those two words, then "define the essence of an ECU"... Deal with oddballs on the spec line... I might take it one step further and require that the factory main-board to connector pinouts remain unmodified.

The idea is to allow programable chips on the stock unit, like Wolf or ?? provides. NOT to allow the guts to be replaced or modified to the point where they might as well have been replaced...
 
I like this approach, however I think maybe we should just allow the stock throttlebody diameter and configuration be the limiting factor. Set the Cis meters and Digfant style flapper boxes free in favor of modern air flow meters or mass density set-ups. This would help the older inefficient cars get up to par with the modern fuel delivery systems. Do we specify that injectors must remain stock as well? That would force the mechanical guys to use that old mechanical meter, while allowing the motronic/flapper box people to remove it.
So open sensors and injectors too. Just limit air by saying that the stock intake manifold and throttle body remain in place.

So I'd say Do This: :024:

Electronic Fuel injection systems are open to include processors input and output devices. All intake air must pass through the stock throttelbody and intake manifold. [/b]
Click to expand...

THIS is where we get in big trouble, and fast.

First, each car is different..in some the airflow metering device is the limiting factor, in others, it isn't. Any monkeying around with the physical properties will end up as a post classification comp adjustment. Bad...
 
I like this approach, however I think maybe we should just allow the stock throttlebody diameter and configuration be the limiting factor. Set the Cis meters and Digfant style flapper boxes free in favor of modern air flow meters or mass density set-ups. This would help the older inefficient cars get up to par with the modern fuel delivery systems. Do we specify that injectors must remain stock as well? That would force the mechanical guys to use that old mechanical meter, while allowing the motronic/flapper box people to remove it.
So open sensors and injectors too. Just limit air by saying that the stock intake manifold and throttle body remain in place.

So I'd say Do This: :024:

Electronic Fuel injection systems are open to include processors input and output devices. All intake air must pass through the stock throttelbody and intake manifold.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Hell lets just add SIRs so we can be sure the HP limit is not pushed over the top.
 
It seems like a lot of the anti "open rule" comments assume that spending a ton of money on hardware and development will become to only way to compete, and I'm just not convinced that is the case. I feel like it will prove to be far more effective and economical to work with the stock system then to replace it. The manufacturers paid some bright young gifted engineer to get it right and make it efficient, because both the consumer and the government are watching their every move. Let them spend their resources on development of engine management and the privateer can wisely spend his time and spend the wear on the engine developing driving skills and car set up. I'm not convinced you'll have any advantage over your stock system with an aftermarket system, So if someone chooses to spend his resources in that manner, I will be happy to assist them, and happy to compete with them. The tradition of auto racing in general includes the competition between pieces of hardware and the men who care for them, it does not include any promise that one chassis suitability or the other will be equalized.

That's my take. Like this:
Electronic Fuel injection systems are open to include processors input and output devices. All intake air must pass through the stock throttelbody and intake manifold.
 
That's my take. Like this:
Electronic Fuel injection systems are open to include processors input and output devices. All intake air must pass through the stock throttelbody and intake manifold.
[/b]
Click to expand...

this all is sounding way too much like the "P" classes for me. :wacko:
 
The way I see it, you either do that or you have to limit it to chips/flash stock box. You can't open it half way, if you do, the demons will just rush out, remember Pandora?
 
Nice thread - a couple thoughts not yet seen.

1. How many prospective kids are there with an import on the street that already have tossed the stock boxes. This is a relatively inexpensive way to work and tune a motor - given that you aren't constrained by the 'stock box' rule. I.e. changing this rule may actually attract new young racers.

2. What is the real cost - as the rule sits I can already call out and get a programed ecu for my Nissan for 500. Now if you change this rule - I can look at the 1200 units which I can actually tune with my laptop. BTW - I have that 1200 dollars spent so many different ways - my spherical bearings, a Data Aq system with GPS, starting a new motor build... In the end someone will have to decide how much they have and if they get more from data about their driving from the GPS, better tuned engines with ecu, or more stable suspension with bearings... I can't buy it all...

3. Going back to put everything back to stock will be an impossible enforcement task - and btw how will you know that I don't have a stock ecu from an automatic in my car... Let the protests start flyin.

4. If this really has become an intractable problem - do like F1 or Nascar, seal the boxes and pass them out each weekend - these can be one brand custom box everyone has to wire for, or there are boxes of honda ecus, nissan ecus, etc. If there is a custom box, then all those carburated cars or mechanical FI cars can't race.

I agree with openning up the rule on the box - but like I said if you leave it the way it is, I'll buy the bearings or the GPS.


Jason.
 
Joe Harlan-I never thought you could be SO eloquent AND logical at the same time. For once, I'm finding it comfortable to be in your corner! It's intersting to see that those demonstrating the least understanding of the problem are the most disposed to opening it up. Magic thinking! Send them to a 12 step program, they're delusional.
 
As far as the original intent of the ECU rule - I don't know 100% but I am 99.9% sure it was to allow flashes and chips. The CRB at the time decided to get 'smart' with the words and it came back to bite us all in the ass. You will all soon be asked for your input on 3 choices: Status quo, back in the bottle or open it up.
[/b]
Click to expand...

Thanks Andy, makes sense. If that's the case then I can see no reason why ECU's should be allowed to remain essentially 'open' (within a small box). I vote for back in the bottle. Change the rule to prevent the very thing that has caused this controversy to begin with; REPLACEMENT ECU.
 
Thanks Andy, makes sense. If that's the case then I can see no reason why ECU's should be allowed to remain essentially 'open' (within a small box). I vote for back in the bottle. Change the rule to prevent the very thing that has caused this controversy to begin with; REPLACEMENT ECU.
[/b]
Click to expand...

the next question then should be....what are the unintended consequences of going back to chipped/reflashed pieces?

are we going to end up at the same place with $5000 chips providing ignition/gear/acceleration based TC and all sorts of garbage?
 
... It's intersting to see that those demonstrating the least understanding of the problem are the most disposed to opening it up. ...[/b]
Click to expand...

Oooh. By inference then, those most disposed to opening it up seem to have the least understanding of the problem? TWEET! Personal foul while shooting - two shots from the line!

:OLA::OLA:
:OLA::OLA:
:OLA::OLA:
:OLA::OLA:

Here's the current (and ever-growing) rule from the ITCS:

Fuel injected cars may alter or replace the engine management computer, or ECU, provided that all modifications are done within the original OEM ECU housing. Only the stock (unmodified) OEM ECU connection to the wiring harness may be used. The allowance to modify the ECU in no way permits the addition of wiring, sensors, or piggybacked computers outside of the OEM ECU housing. The stock (unmodified) wiring harness must be used. The installation of a resistor is allowed between the sensor and the OEM wiring harness. Adjustable fuel pressure regulators are permitted.

I got news for y'all - if you simply take out "or replace," you've done absolutely nothing to materially change the rule. I can "alter" the stock board and other bits right the hell out of there, and "alter" my Magic (er, Motec) parts right in...

K

Edit - can i, under the current rules, connect a guage to that allowed adjustable FPR? :026:
 
I got news for y'all - if you simply take out "or replace," you've done absolutely nothing to materially change the rule. I can "alter" the stock board and other bits right the hell out of there, and "alter" my Magic (er, Motec) parts right in...
[/b]
Click to expand...

Edit, I agree.

Wording needs to be added to specifically allow those 'mods' such as flashing the ECU and/or replacing the PROM. All other components must remain unmodified etc.
 
A low end ECU working through the stock, unmodified harness will be just as cheap as the "chip of the week" that you need to spend hours getting right on the dyno. You will never be able to enforce the stock ecu rule as tech has no clue what stock is. Every 16 year old kid with a honda can do the base tune needed with the add-on boxes available today. What is cheaper, a blown $4500.00 motor for lack of adjustment or a $1000.00 ecu that plugs into the stock harness? When you add all the legal exhaust and intake mods to an IT car the fuel and timing curve will need to be adjusted. If the car came with factory electronic injection all the sensors NEEDED are already there. Give adjustment without any new inputs and you keep balance without a huge investment. Open the wire and sensors and you might as well give us the slicks too--we will already be there.
 
I would be all for putting the genie back in the bottle, but for one problem: how do you handle the cars that came programmed with rev/speed limiters? Show me a work-around for that one issue and I'll jump on the stock-ecu bandwagon in a heartbeat.

And I have to agree with Kirk et al, just deleting the "or replace" language from the rule isn't going to make any difference. The guys with enough money will just find a way to "alter" the ECU to work exactly like a Motec.

If though, as it would seem, the idea is to allow everyone to have the same advantages as some do now under the current rule, then make ECUs open. Period. No extra wiring, harnesses, sensors, etc., just open up the ECU, and allow an adapter to be used to attach your stock wiring harness. Let me ask this; are there cars in IT right now that could not use any of the aftermarket ECUs out there? If there are, I'll bet they are few and far between, and could probably be dealt with on a case by case basis with very little effort. So, to answer Andy's question; "Fuel injected cars may alter or replace the engine management computer, or ECU. Only the stock (unmodified) OEM ECU connection and wiring harness may be used. The installation of a resistor...".
 
A low end ECU working through the stock, unmodified harness will be just as cheap as the "chip of the week" that you need to spend hours getting right on the dyno. You will never be able to enforce the stock ecu rule as tech has no clue what stock is. Every 16 year old kid with a honda can do the base tune needed with the add-on boxes available today. What is cheaper, a blown $4500.00 motor for lack of adjustment or a $1000.00 ecu that plugs into the stock harness? When you add all the legal exhaust and intake mods to an IT car the fuel and timing curve will need to be adjusted. If the car came with factory electronic injection all the sensors NEEDED are already there. Give adjustment without any new inputs and you keep balance without a huge investment. Open the wire and sensors and you might as well give us the slicks too--we will already be there. [/b]
Click to expand...



I agree with Steve with the exception of "Open the wire and sensors and you might as well give us the slicks too--we will already be there." These wires and sensors will not produce any major gains as long as they are not allowed to be hooked up to traction control, which IMO should be illegal as well as abs brakes. That said, as long as we retain stock MAF, TB and such there could not be any major gains due the stock components and the engines builds, assuming that everything is legal. Why shouldn't we use as an example, a Haltech wiring harness with Haltech system, or a Motec wiring harness with a Motec System? By doing this we will all benefit by not paying as much for the systems, no matter who's we choose to use.



BTW, ITAC, aren't you glad I started this one? :bash_1_: :D
 
I agree with Steve with the exception of "Open the wire and sensors and you might as well give us the slicks too--we will already be there." These wires and sensors will not produce any major gains as long as they are not allowed to be hooked up to traction control, which IMO should be illegal as well as abs brakes. That said, as long as we retain stock MAF, TB and such there could not be any major gains due the stock components and the engines builds, assuming that everything is legal. Why shouldn't we use as an example, a Haltech wiring harness with Haltech system, or a Motec wiring harness with a Motec System? By doing this we will all benefit by not paying as much for the systems, no matter who's we choose to use.



BTW, ITAC, aren't you glad I started this one? :bash_1_: :D
[/b]
Click to expand...
Really, How much FI experience do you have? How about cold air bypass that most if not all EFI systems use during warmup? How are you gonna prevent me from opening this valve and adding fuel through the 3d map and creating 15 more HP because of the additional air? There are lots of gain for those that want to be creative and they will be impossible to polic with a free system. As stated earlier my current systemn in my RS car has traction control (effective) with out any additional sensor wires. No wheel speed inputs to the ecu.
 
"I would be all for putting the genie back in the bottle, but for one problem: how do you handle the cars that came programmed with rev/speed limiters? Show me a work-around for that one issue and I'll jump on the stock-ecu bandwagon in a heartbeat"

Chip tuning (reprograming or reprogramed e-prom)

Edit: PLEASE jump on the stock ECU bandwagon! This may be your last chance to save this class. phil
 
Andy B:
"How about this for a new ECU rule:

Stock ECU's must be retained. Removable chips may be substituted. OBD cars may be re-flashed. No other modification to the OEM housing or circut board is permitted.

(BTW: I have over $3K and a years development into a programmable unit that has yet to see the track in my car)"

Andy, let me acknowlege you for that. That position takes great integrity and willingness to put the good of this class ahead of your own intersts. I am glad you bring more than just an opinion to the table.
Cheers, phil
 
I agree with Steve with the exception of "Open the wire and sensors and you might as well give us the slicks too--we will already be there." These wires and sensors will not produce any major gains as long as they are not allowed to be hooked up to traction control, which IMO should be illegal as well as abs brakes. That said, as long as we retain stock MAF, TB and such there could not be any major gains due the stock components and the engines builds, assuming that everything is legal. Why shouldn't we use as an example, a Haltech wiring harness with Haltech system, or a Motec wiring harness with a Motec System? By doing this we will all benefit by not paying as much for the systems, no matter who's we choose to use.



BTW, ITAC, aren't you glad I started this one? :bash_1_: :D
[/b]
Click to expand...
Be careful. Some cars this is true, but with others you open the door for some very creative work with cams, valves, and aux devices. If the car ran stock with the sensors it comes with it will run fine with those same sensors fed into a new ecu. Doesn't take much to pull the signal from the stock harness.

Joe, I just wish I had the torque to care about traction control. :lol:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top